Philosophy
5. What do you think Kant’s ethical theory tells us about the morality or immorality of abortion? Is it clear what utilitarianism tells us about abortion or euthanasia? Throughout the previous thirty-eight years ago since the U.S Supreme Court legalized abortion as a medical procedure, the topic of abortion has spurned several heated debates both socially and politically. In such a heightened contemporary context, it would be rather appropriate to consider the moral application of Immanuel Kant’s philosophy, one of the greatest minds in the eighteenth centuries, to the enduring morality debate over abortion. Setting the discussion regarding the morality and immorality of abortion within the Kantian ethics framework provides one with a view that transition from the frequently inflammatory pro-choice and anti-abortion discussion points and towards a deep lucid, philosophical argument of such a controversial topic. Kant’s ethical theory regarding the immorality of abortion highlights that every individual is endowed with some sense of dignity and respect. Based on Kant’s theory, all human behaviors as well as actions are done simply because are considered the right and appropriate things to be done. Additionally, people’s behaviors and actions are weight in terms of their moral appropriateness instead of any other terms or grounds. Kant would assert that the act of abortion is definitely immoral considering the fact that killing another person is illegal and thus
Utilitarian’s believe that under certain circumstances an abortion could be justified. For example if the mother doesn’t have the financial means, utilitarian’s would understand living a miserable life would contradict the idea of maximizing happiness to all, including the mother who doesn’t have to carry the financial burden a child would bring to an already bad financial situation. Another case would be if the family knew the baby knows the baby would be brought into this world with a disability, why make him or her suffer (only if the disability could not be cured medically). The thought process for utilitarian’s is that if the child will live a miserable life, why make them live if the abortion could be done before the fetus is even developed into a baby. Utilitarian’s are much more flexible when dealing with an issue such as abortion if the circumstance allows for it and if it maximizes happiness to all, if not most. Therefore an abortion may be decided with the consideration of all in mind.
The issue of abortion is one of the most sensitive and controversial issues faced by modern societies. This issue leads to topics of whether abortion is right or wrong, if it is the actual killing of a person, and what actually defines the moral status of a fetus. In this paper, I will be arguing against Bonnie Steinbock, who believes that abortions are morally acceptable. So I will be supporting the view that abortions are not morally acceptable.
There are many factors that are taken into consideration when determining if abortion is morally permissible, or wrong including; sentience of the fetus, the fetuses right to life, the difference between adult human beings and fetuses, the autonomy of the pregnant woman, and the legality of abortion. Don Marquis argues that abortion is always morally wrong, excluding cases in which the woman is threatened by pregnancy, or abortion after rape, because fetuses have a valuable future. Mary Anne Warren contends that late term abortions are morally permissible because birth is the most significant event for a fetus, and a woman’s autonomy should never be suspended.
Therefore because according to Kantian ethics, the unborn are considered persons (Manninen, 2008), they deserve to be treated as such, with respect to their individual desires. As the unborn cannot make their desires known, from a deontological perspective it would be unethical to interfere with the child’s natural development.
If all the following conclusions are acceptable then the conclusion of abortion being morally wrong is accepted. Each of these premises will be defended throughout this paper.
“Abortion is the spontaneous or artificially induced expulsion of an embryo or fetus” (Abortion, 2002). An artificially induced abortion is the type referred to in the legal context. Abortions happen in different situations. The question comes when is it the right or wrong choice. The root question becomes the moment a fetus becomes a person and entitled to rights. The fetus could be a person at conception, during the pregnancy, or at birth. The deciding moment differs from the Pro-life group and Pro-choice group. After critically analyzing four different arguments about the pros and cons of abortion, one will be able to understand the ethical, moral, and
Kant’s theory of deontology and Mill’s theory of utilitarianism provide starkly different approaches to assigning moral value to ethical dilemmas, two modern dilemmas being commercial surrogacy and physician-assisted suicide. This essay will expound upon the process of deciding moral value within each ethical theory and then apply this decision process to the two ethical dilemmas. Arguments will be posited in support or in opposition to the proposed ethical dilemmas according to the ethical theories. The discussion will revolve around the theories as proposed by the specific authors mentioned above in their relevant works.
The ethical dilemma regarding the “Pro-choice Vs. Pro-life can be answered by the Deontological ethical theory. The Deontological theory is also called the duty-based ethics. To explain, Deontological theory states that the righteous of an action or a deed is determined by the principal motivation of doing that particular act ("BBC - Ethics - Introduction to ethics: Duty-based ethics", n.d.). In addition, according to Immanuel Kant, the philosopher who introduced this belief, the justification of an individual’s every action should be based on one’s own reason and mental analysis rather than analyzing it based on traditions (Kurtz & Burr, 2016). Furthermore, Kant’s work titled, “Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Moral, explained that human beings
This author has chosen to discuss the ethical issues of abortion. This is a highly debated topic that will exist amongst women. It is happening at high rates. “In 2013, 664,435 legal induced abortions
Abortion is always argued with different cases and play a main role in medical ethics (blackwell.,p291).It is evidently reasonable for some to argue that in moral situation, abortion is a murder and it should be illegal, while others may claim that abortion is woman’s right when concerning on autonomy ( The abortion debate in Australia). Opponents of making abortion legal claim that abortion is a kind of murder on extend of moral situation. It is always regarded as a sin to kill a person who is no aggressor in most moral communities (new ethics 1). Fetus is a biologically human as it is not just a part of the mothers, such as a lung or a kidney. On the contrary, it is obvious that fetus is human due to he or she has genetic code of human and human parents as well (abortion myth p5). Moreover, it has potentiality to be a person with primary moral worth (text book p210-211). As Gillion (new ethics) pointed out, every person has his right to life, especially he is not an aggressor. This point is also been pointed by (Rebecca and john,Blackwell p204), “embryos has a right to life” .The fetus is innocent and
Abortion is one of the most controversial topics of all times. The definition most people associate with abortion is the termination of unwanted pregnancy. In their essay, “The Wrong of Abortion”, Patrick Lee and Robert P. George argue that intentional abortion is unjust and therefore objectively immoral no matter the circumstances. Also, they argue that “the burden of carrying the baby is significantly less than the harm the baby would suffer by being killed; the mother and father have a special responsibility to the child; it follows that intentional abortion (even in few cases where the baby’s death is an unintended but foreseen side effect) is unjust ” (24).
Immanuel Kant is the founder of deontological ethics. The term deontology comes from the Greek word, “deon”, meaning duty. The theory states that people are morally obligated to act within a certain set of rules or principles, regardless of whatever outcome. An action is considered to be morally permissible not because of the product of the action, but because of the characteristics of the action itself. In relation to abortion, would Kant feel as if it is morally wrong or morally permissible?
The first ethical issue will be right to life and abortion. Abortion remains controversial and a highly debated subject. The ethical debate concerning abortion is the considerations of a woman’s autonomy and the rights of the woman and the unborn child. The parent/ child relationship and assessing the best interests of potential children also provide considerable scope for ethical discussion. (Jones K, Chaloner C 2007). A factor in the ethical future of abortion is the perception of morality, or of actively ending the life of an unborn human being. This process of deductive reasoning explains the most common anti-abortion argument: First, the fetus is an innocent human being. Second, it is morally wrong to kill an innocent human being and lastly, it is morally wrong to kill a fetus. This reasoning can also be applied to support a viewpoint to those who support abortion. First the fetus has no moral status. Secondly, it is not morally wrong to destroy that which has no moral status. Lastly, it is not morally wrong to destroy a fetus.
Kant had a different ethical system which was based on reason. According to Kant reason was the fundamental authority in determining morality. All humans possess the ability to reason, and out of this ability comes two basic commands: the hypothetical imperative and the categorical imperative. In focusing on the categorical imperative, in this essay I will reveal the underlying relationship between reason and duty.
Kant was a deontological thinker and according to his theory of the Categorical Imperative, one must find a maxim in respect to abortion which they could universalize in order to discover what to do when faced with unwanted pregnancy. He doesn’t tackle this problem but he could have argued that abortion is immoral in all circumstances as he strongly believed that human life was of infinite value and that it should be protected. Furthermore, he also believed that one of the universal laws was ‘do not murder.’ Having an abortion would break this universal law and end a valuable life. However, he might also have argued that all people should have the right to determine what happens to their own body. In this case, a universal maxim might permit abortion on the